I am a GOOD American

[LapDog]

Dole,

I'm rolling! Stop it! You're hurting me!

[LapDog]

Taco-

You returned! You're right about that. I am judging and name-calling you, so I am something of a hypocrite. Reread my earlier post and you'll see that I acknowledged that I was sullying myself.

I'm not sure I understand your point about the facism vs communism, though.

[KCTitus]

True, I can see why you would want to leave it out, but as a dictatorship, which I think all of us as Americans oppose, it is by definition 'suppression of opposition'. I think that fascism as a synonym for racism is a recent re-definition of the word, unless, one believes that 'strict nationalism' is inherently racist.

As far as the 'rich get richer' argument, it's almost as silly as the original fascist accusations. It's another one of those sound bite accusations designed to put one on the defensive rather than a support of an opinion.

As far as bullet proof - I would agree, I believe that's why TJ cut and run with the 'high road' response after all of the epithets he'd been running with, it was a laughable response.

I had a big presentation to give at the office... I'm done now.

I don't really want to get into it about fascism versus communism and the parralells that can be drawn by comparing them to liberals and conservatives. It's an entirely different subject, that takes more energy than I'm willing to offer it right now...

[LapDog]

Originally posted by KCTitus
As far as bullet proof - I would agree, I believe that's why TJ cut and run with the 'high road' response after all of the epithets he'd been running with, it was a laughable response.

Thanks for saying it.

[KCTitus]

TacoJohn: what is 'right wing'. A 'right winger' in China would be considered a hard line communist. Does that jive with a 'right winger' label in the U.S.?

Of course not, your definition or lackthereof, is seriously wanting.

The function of a fascist does not fit with Fraz's stated beliefs. You're not going to seriously contend that Fraz is for large centralized government that controls industry and financial markets.

If so, your education is losing credibility with me.

[LapDog]

Taco John-

I agree with you on that one. I'm not overly interested in pursuing that either. Just wanted to let you know I wasn't understanding your point so you could find a different way to get it across.

LapDog

[oleman47]

Lapdog
Thanks for your observation about this board! There is a slight drift to the right.
Others
Facism is detemined more by its intolerance then its structure or economics. It is the use of this intolerance to achieve political goals. The target may not be of a different race, although that is often the case, but just those who think, or act, or look different. "them". Kings rule by divine right and facists by allegded superiority.

Taco
I found your parody of the arrogance and what followed concerning the "bad american", to be within that context and should be judged as an answer and not a different thread.

Boy, how I wish some of you had been born in Mexico.

[LapDog]

Uh oh...

This is turning into a relay race...
I hope Taco John has somebody to handoff to!


LapDog
dang board keeps interferin with my postin
(not complainin Austin, I'll take what you give me)

[KCTitus]

I cant even find 'facism' in my dictionary, so I guess you can define it however you wish.

Fascism, on the other hand, is defined as a dictatorship with a large centralized government. I dare say that it's somewhat silly to call today's conservatives supporters of 'large centralized government'.

All dictatorships are predicated on intolerance, the intolerance of the dictator whatever he/she may not tolerate.

I just dont think one can use 'racism' and fascism as synonyms.

[DanT]

Britannica.com has a pretty good article on Fascism, from which I've excerpted a paragraph below. Fascism isn't so much about the size of government as it is about the subordination of individual will and the coordination of corporate and government functions in the interests of power.

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article...35&tocid=66529
Fascism rejected the main philosophical trends of the 18th and 19th centuries, the “spirit” of the American and French revolutions with their emphasis on individual liberty and on the equality of men and races. The message of the Enlightenment had served to enhance the dignity of the individual and had emphasized openness in a secularized society. In contrast, fascism extolled the supreme sovereignty of the nation as an absolute. It demanded the revival of the spirit of the ancient polis (city-state), above all of Sparta with its discipline and total devotion to duty, and of the complete coordination of all intellectual and political thought and activities against modern individualism and scientific skepticism. The Italian slogan “to believe, to obey, to combat” was fascism's antithesis to “liberty, equality, fraternity,” and to the prophetic and Christian messages of peace. The combination of an unquestioning faith and of a virile combativeness was to transform the nation into a permanently mobilized armed force to conquer, maintain, and expand power.

Let me make two points:

There is a difference between a racist and a racist remark. I have co-workers that make racist remarks to me or in conversation with others. I do not necessarily think that they are racists (perhaps some are), but they definitely reflect the racist thinking and practices that exist in US society. A part of racism is the de-humanizing of a group, and the building up of rationalizations to excuse the practice of racism. For instance, in the Anti-Bellum South a common rationalization was that Africans were intellectually and morally inferior to whites, and that therefore it was actually "the white man's burden" to bring Christian religion to Africans, whether they wanted it or not. It was further rationalized that slavery was actually an institution that provided the opportunity for Africans to benefit from contact with "superior" civilizations, whether they wanted it or not. Of course, the cruder, more dehumanizing aspects of racism grew along with this "benevolent" view. Racism, of course, still exists in this society ( and others), although it has been weakened by the victories of the Civil Rights movement, and by revolutions in countries such as South Africa and Algeria. An outcome of continued racist practices in this country, is the reaction against those practices and behaviors. I think John was reacting against what he perceived to be a racist remark---whether the person who made the remark is a racist is something that, I think, John may be uncertain of, but still it's not surprising that John, or anyone who has faced consistent discrimination, would react in such a way. However, on the other hand, baiting, whether it's race-baiting, or red-baiting, does nothing to achieve any meaningful discussion, and always devolves into, you guessed it, name-calling hysterics.

Secondly, most of the definitions of fascism are useless, because they are so broad that they could include Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, the slave-owning South, and maybe the Roman Empire. To find a useful definition of fascism, I think it's necessary to read books such as "Fascism and Big Business" by Daniel Guerin, a French journalist who lived in Germany and France prior to WWII.

Soliday

[LapDog]

I wholeheartedly concur.

[HC_Chief]

soliday - I realize you are trying to rationalize TJ's comments as you interpretted them, but let me assure you: the guy is a flailing demagogue. I've dealt with him on many previous occasions on a Broncos' forum - he flings aspersions and labels freely; with complete disregard and abandon. He is the kind of person who gives 'liberals' a bad name and helps to perpetuate the whacko leftist stereotype. TJ can come off as a bright individual - and indeed, I believe he is - but not wholely informed, and vary narrow in his perception. One day, I think he'll 'see the light'

[LapDog]

I wholeheartedly concur.
:confused: